The Southland Times. WEDNESDAY, MAY 29. 1940. War Council or War Cabinet? .

Southland Times, Issue 24138, 29 May 1940, Page 6

The Southland Times. WEDNESDAY, MAY 29. 1940. War Council or War Cabinet? .

rtf THE past two days public interest has been centred on the Government’s proposal to establish a War Council. When the Prime Minister made his announcement on Sunday night the bitterness with which he spoke against criticism left in many minds a doubt that the proposals would be as far-reaching as at first seemed possible. Suspicions were strengthened when Mr Fraser added the phrase “as required” to his statement that universal service would be introduced. By that time it was difficult not to feel that he was seeking to avoid extreme concessions to public opinion, and that his major aim was not so much to go the full distance towards a unified war effort as to fall back upon some kind of compromise that would allow the Government to avoid any real surrender of authority. These suspicions could be dispelled immediately by a declaration that the War Council will have supreme powers in the direction of New Zealand’s war policy. If this were in the Government’s mind, however, it is hard to see why a procedure so unwieldy should have been favoured instead of a national Cabinet designed to utilize the best available men in a time of national danger. It seems more than likely that the Government has been thinking of a council which would function mainly in an advisory capacity. The Leader of the Opposition has already informed the Prime Minister that the proposal does not appear to meet the position. “I pointed out,” said Mr Hamilton in a statement printed yesterday, “that nothing short of a supreme authority, absolutely unifying the country, invested with absolute powers, capable of inspiring confidence and giving necessary authority for immediate action, would be considered by the Opposition.” A further discussion was arranged, and by this time the Government’s intentions may have been made plain. It is to be hoped they reach the full measure of public expectation.

A Great-Example

The case for a national Government is so strong in the present circumstances that any attempt to avoid a coalition will be regarded as a miserable evasion. Labour speakers weakly refer to “a clear mandate from the people,” and make no mention of the fact that it was given to the present Government long before the outbreak of war. At a meeting of the Auckland Hospital Board on Monday, Mrs M. M.- Dreaver invited an unfavourable comparison by saying that, “unlike the Conservative Government in Britain, the New Zealand Government had the mass of the people behind it . ..” Everybody knows, of course, that the Parliamentary strength of the Chamberlain Ministry was relatively even greater than that of the Labour Government in New Zealand. Yet this did not prevent the British Prime Minister from realizing that the voting at a distant election was no longer a guide to public opinion. His prompt and disinterested action in clearing the way for an all-party War Cabinet won him the respect and admiration of British people throughout the world. Mr Fraser himself spoke of it in the warmest terms. Is it possible that, in the light of this great example, he and his colleagues can still shelter behind the threadbare cry of political interest? The position in New Zealand differs from that in Britain only in the fact that the enemy is not established at a short distance from its shores. But the danger which threatens England is a threat also to this country. If the Allies were defeated, the standard of living in the Dominion would sink at once to zero; the country’s independence and even the survival of its people as a nation would be placed in jeopardy. At this time there may still be individuals and small minorities incapable of facing realities: such persons and groups would argue their sectional prejudices while their small world collapsed about their ears. But the Government is entrusted with responsibilities too’ great to allow it to be influenced by petty considerations. It now proposes to take extreme powers, on the lines endorsed by the British House of Commons, which are far too wide to be invoked by a single party. They can be accepted by the people only if all sections know that they are represented by their leaders in a national Cabinet. Anything less than this cannot fail to precipitate a disunity and unrest which would be unthink-, able in these grave hours.